Profile of Jae For Jett

While I do agree 100% with you, aren't they similar in cost? Also, aren't ober rifles a lot better than tommy rifles, especially on the move? I'm not sure about this, but don't obers also get better veterancy bonuses overall? Commandos are also doctrinal while obers are not, and are the only elite infantry squad brits have (actually, they're the only other combat infantry brits have besides tommies too). The thing that mostly makes me agree with you, though, is the fact that they have camo and are a 5 man squad.

And at the end of the day, commandos are much better with stens anyway and this is mostly a moot point.

Ober rifles being better than tommy rifles isn't really the point though. The two brens more or less equal the mg34 AND the 3 ober rifles (again, long range). So imagine if obers had 3 extra tommy rifles of DPS.

Yes, obers get better veterancy (you can make arguments about the ambush bonus, smoke, or whatever else being conditionally better, but as a whole, obers definitely do have better vet).

I think timing is a consideration too. Besides this, I think what you posted is a fairly complete picture of the comparison.

Anyway, I think the point is that there is justification for reasonable concern that enfields + brens become an issue, and that would be enough to warrant counteractive measures (nerfs to their brens) - especially since their current bren combo seems fine in its current state.

They cost a lot more and are doctrinal, so I don’t see why a high long range dps model in exchange for almost no potency while moving would need to be nerfed.

Because they are at ober level when they have brens. Putting them over ober level is probably just too much. Its not like theyre only slightly better than tommies, and its not like I actually suggested putting their rifle + bren performance worse than their current sten + bren performance.

try this:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7gwy65JLbSRMEJ3M2ZPandMMW8/view

Tightrope actually looked into getting the spreadsheet actual hosting, so no downloads needed now!

https://coh2db.com/stats/

I don’t really think they would be OP with Carbines to be honest. But it would be good to check the stats on that before I make any grand declarations. Lol

I don’t know how to pull stats, could someone compare Commando STENs to Paratrooper M1 Carbines to RE M1 Carbines to Lee Enfields to Paratrooper Thompsons? I know that’s a tall order, but I’m sure that there’s some combination of 5 rifles that would roughly equal 3 commando STENs at close range. It’s ok if they’re better at long range, that just makes the idea of upgrading them less of a no-brainer and more of a tactical choice. (Should I go Carbines and BRENs or get the SMGs? Maybe stealthy PIATs with Carbines? One of each, PIAT and BREN? Should I use the munitions on something else entirely? Etc.)

So uhhh, Para carbines are much better than RE carbines...for perspective, they're also better 1 for 1 than rifleman garands. Para carbines aren't better at long range compared to lee enfields, but I think most would agree that para carbines are still just better overall. I won't compare them to silenced stens or thompsons since I wouldnt say its a comparison that adds much given the previous information.

All said, if their weapons were any stronger at range than RE carbines (and even then...), their DPS would go from insane to broken. Of course, there are mitigating factors in the issue of why rifle + bren armed commandos may not be used anyway, but it's probably best to avoid encountering a potential problem to begin with.

As said before, changes to pfussies were discussed. For various reasons, they did not go through (well to begin with, the decision was to not switch them in for Elite Armor's signal relay; this would have given us the scope to alter them).

Regardless, the take aways from these conversations were that:

-Schrecks and AT rifles (or any other weird AT options you could come up with) would not work - sturms already have schrecks and AT rifles are pretty weak in general (notice how the only faction that has them is the only faction with no other access to handheld AT).

-Whatever the changes were, they had to try as hard as possible to avoid making OKW's early game stronger - this is for obvious reasons.

And, honestly, that kind of eliminates most suggestions here.

For whoever is wondering, the final proposed change to pfusis (if I recall correctly) were that they would be buildable from t0 at 0 cp, cost 280 (? I think), start at 5 men and earn their 6th with vet, and have their g43s + snares + nades locked behind their first tech structure (just like volks stgs + panzerfausts). I really don't think pfusis in this weird repair/utility role would work - OKW doesn't exactly lack in the repair department, and Breakthrough doctrine even already has a capping ability. Having them in an AT role was already addressed previously in my post, but I should also note that we were cautious about anything that could bring back something akin to old volks blobbing. To actually explain the changes, pfusis are a mainline replacement infantry that comes too late to actually replace the mainline. The changes aimed to give OKW, a faction with an oppressive early game and mainline infantry that falls off late game, the option to trade their early game power for mainline infantry that could actually scale really well into the late game, and the changes probably actually work to that end.